If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

ESPN Insider grades the trade

Thought I would share this since Insider is a sub. We got a C, Rox got an A- and the Kings got a B+. Just one time would I like to see the media saying we got the best in a deal.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Rockets: I see this as two trades, both of which benefit Houston. First, the Rockets basically extracted two first-rounders (Hill and the 2012 pick) from New York for taking on Jeffries, plus a potential lottery ticket in 2011.

The trade costs Houston its salary cap space this summer, which now will be spent paying Jeffries to sit at the end of the bench. But since the Rockets didn't have enough room for a max deal and every other team will be flush with cash, I don't think this costs them much. Additionally, Houston should still be able to re-sign Kyle Lowry and Luis Scola without going over the luxury tax.

The deal comes with the bonus of getting the Rockets under the luxury tax for the current season. Unlike every other team scrambling to get under the tax line, Houston managed to do it while adding assets instead of subtracting them. Well played.

With Sacramento, Houston swapped two of the league's most underrated players. Landry is about as good as Martin, but the deal makes so much sense for the Rockets because it gives them a more productive roster. Houston was desperate for a wing who could get his own shot and space the floor. Martin answers both challenges.

The stat-savvy Rockets undoubtedly have noticed Martin's astronomic true shooting percentages (better than 60 in four of the past five seasons). He gets his points without dominating the ball and should thrive from open looks when Yao Ming returns to health next season. He's also familiar with Rick Adelman's system, having played for him in Sacramento.

Losing Landry hurts, but the Rockets managed to rebuild their front line in one shot by acquiring Hill to back up Scola at power forward. The Rockets also can play small with Shane Battier at the 4 and Martin and Trevor Ariza at the wings, something they've rarely done this season because of a shortage of wing talent.

All told, it reshapes their roster to be far more potent next season when Yao returns. In the meantime, the Rockets haven't hurt themselves at all for this season. They got under the luxury tax and grabbed a couple of assets from New York on the exchange. Martin has been injury-prone, and his contract (three years for $36 million after this season) is potentially toxic if he underperforms. But this is about as good a trade as a team can make now that Isiah Thomas and Kevin McHale are out of the league. Grade: A-

Kings: We had been hearing for a while that the Kings weren't looking to trade Martin, but that belied the on-court reality that he and Tyreke Evans go together like peanut butter and onions. And once they pulled the trigger, the Kings got exactly what they were looking for: cap relief and a young, productive, inexpensive power forward in Landry.

Landry makes only $3 million next year, but his low-post scoring ability should provide a nice staple for Sacramento, especially since the Kings' other young bigs, Jason Thompson and Spencer Hawes, have trouble scoring on the block.

The Kings actually took on some salary in this deal ($3.6 million) but might be able to get some savings by buying out Hughes, who likely has no interest in playing eight minutes a game for a lottery team.

More importantly, the deal positions Sacramento (stop me if you've heard this before) to be a major player in the free-agent market. As a result of deals in the past 48 hours, the Kings, Clippers, Wizards and Bulls all have positioned themselves to offer a maximum free-agent contract, while the Knicks now can offer two maximum deals. In the Kings' case, they probably will take a more piecemeal approach -- LeBron ain't coming to Sacto, folks. But if they can add a young point guard to build around with Evans, Omri Casspi, Landry, Thompson and Hawes, they should be in good position to turn things around. Grade: B+

Knicks: It's all or nothing this summer for the Knicks, who set themselves up for their dream scenario -- being able to offer two maximum free-agent contracts -- but did so at considerable cost. By finally ridding themselves of their obligation to Jeffries next year, New York now projects to have about $32 million in cap space, which theoretically positions them to sign Dwyane Wade and LeBron, or one of those two and Chris Bosh.

However, New York gave up a lot of assets in order to make this deal work. The Knicks sent out two young pieces: their 2012 first-round pick (top-5 protected) and young forward Jordan Hill. With no 2010 first-rounder, whomever they entice to take their money will be playing with Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Toney Douglas, Eddy Curry, Bill Walker and six guys making the minimum. (No, not David Lee -- he's an unrestricted free agent).

Rodriguez also could stay in the mix if the cap number comes in higher than anticipated or if New York can trade Douglas on draft day. This is a great situation for Rodriguez to thrive in since coach Mike D'Antoni's system is so dependent on creative point guards, so we'll see whether he makes good on his promise as a drive-and-kick guy.

New York should be able to trade Curry for another fat contract (no pun intended) next year, but it remains to be seen whether the lure of the Big Apple is enough to overcome what looks to be a limited supporting cast.

Meanwhile, consider the other scenario. If those A-list free agents stay with their original teams, the Knicks are pretty much hosed -- they'd be left to re-sign Lee, overpay some other second-tier free agent and go 32-50 for the next half-decade. This is a high-risk strategy forced upon them by the misery of the Isiah Thomas era, and it remains unclear how well it will pan out.

Finally, a lot of Knicks fans are asking me about McGrady. Basketball-wise, he's totally irrelevant to this deal -- New York can't make the playoffs no matter what McGrady does, and the Knicks won't be in a position to keep T-Mac if he plays well. Grade: C

Who the hell is ESPN to grade NBA trades? I'm sure that if the Knicks sign two superstars this summer those ESPN analysts are going to look mighty stupid.

Well considering they've been covering the NBA since the 80's they know a thing or two. Not to mention 3/4 of the staff either previously played basketball or was a basketball writer for a prominent newspaper like the LA Times or NY Times. ESPN isn't always right, but they know their ****. They probably wont be too concerned about what grade they gave the Knicks at the time, regardless of what happens this offseason. Theres a pretty large change we wont land 2 big free agents so I mean, this was a massive risk. Of course as Knicks fans, we love the cap space and love the balls that Donnie showed but I think its too early to give this trade a grade. For now I like it in the sense that Donnie rid of nearly all of Isiah's contract and that we are now set up for a busy offseason.

Well considering they've been covering the NBA since the 80's they know a thing or two. Not to mention 3/4 of the staff either previously played basketball or was a basketball writer for a prominent newspaper like the LA Times or NY Times. ESPN isn't always right, but they know their ****. They probably wont be too concerned about what grade they gave the Knicks at the time, regardless of what happens this offseason. Theres a pretty large change we wont land 2 big free agents so I mean, this was a massive risk. Of course as Knicks fans, we love the cap space and love the balls that Donnie showed but I think its too early to give this trade a grade. For now I like it in the sense that Donnie rid of nearly all of Isiah's contract and that we are now set up for a busy offseason.

Are you implying that ESPN knows 80 percent of the future and can foresee things a lot better than the average NBA executive? Why don't NBA owners just hire ESPN analysts to be their general managers and make front office decisions for them? As much basketball knowledge as some of these guys possess, they aren't geniuses and have been wrong many times when evaluating transactions around the league.And ESPN has always had their personal biases against NY teams.A lot of people that work for them are Boston homers.I never take anything they say seriously and I definitely am not going to start worrying about the Knicks' chances of acquiring 2 free agents this summer just because a couple of dimwitted ESPN analysts decided to give the Knicks a cheap grade.

Are you implying that ESPN knows 80 percent of the future and can foresee things a lot better than the average NBA executive? Why don't NBA owners just hire ESPN analysts to be their general managers and make front office decisions for them? As much basketball knowledge as some of these guys possess, they aren't geniuses and have been wrong many times when evaluating transactions around the league.And ESPN has always had their personal biases against NY teams.A lot of people that work for them are Boston homers.I never take anything they say seriously and I definitely am not going to start worrying about the Knicks' chances of acquiring 2 free agents this summer just because a couple of dimwitted ESPN analysts decided to give the Knicks a cheap grade.

When did I say they were right about this? I said that there's no way to grade it until this off-season plays out. I don't know what made you infer that I thought ESPN analyst could tell the future, but I did say they know something and have been a reliable source of information in the world of sports for over 20 years.

When did I say they were right about this? I said that there's no way to grade it until this off-season plays out. I don't know what made you infer that I thought ESPN analyst could tell the future, but I did say they know something and have been a reliable source of information in the world of sports for over 20 years.

P.S.... since when does 3/4= 80%?

It is obvious that these analysts are evaluating these trades based on how it will affect the future outcomes of the teams involved.I'm saying that just because these guys possess a certain basketball IQ doesn't mean that their speculations are future facts that are written on golden tablets.This is why I think it's pretty nonsensical for anyone to hand out grades before the actual results show.Yet we have many people who will become extremely skeptical of the Knicks' chances of getting two superstars because they take sports analysts seriously.

It is obvious that these analysts are evaluating these trades based on how it will affect the future outcomes of the teams involved.I'm saying that just because these guys possess a certain basketball IQ doesn't mean that their speculations are future facts that are written on golden tablets.This is why I think it's pretty nonsensical for anyone to hand out grades before the actual results show.Yet we have many people who will become extremely skeptical of the Knicks' chances of getting two superstars because they take sports analysts seriously.

Still not understanding why you are quoting me...I said in my response that there is no grade to be given out, yet you keep trying to hammer home the exact same point. My original post was simply refuting your apparent outrage at espn rating trades. I never once said i agreed...in fact, i disagreed. People will always by what they say and its unfortunate becaise they arent always right. But cmon...saying espn isnt credible is like breaking the bro code.

Still not understanding why you are quoting me...I said in my response that there is no grade to be given out, yet you keep trying to hammer home the exact same point. My original post was simply refuting your apparent outrage at espn rating trades. I never once said i agreed...in fact, i disagreed. People will always by what they say and its unfortunate becaise they arent always right. But cmon...saying espn isnt credible is like breaking the bro code.

I stated that these ESPN analysts possess normal basketball IQ's, I just don't look at them as the geniuses that many people like to call them.

New York should be able to trade Curry for another fat contract (no pun intended) next year, but it remains to be seen whether the lure of the Big Apple is enough to overcome what looks to be a limited supporting cast.

This is what makes or breaks 2 seasons (with D Walsh at the helm) of pulling our hair out in anticipation while dealing with losses and Duhon.

I don't believe this trade was anywhere near as "high-risk" as it's being made out to be. Obviously, for us to hit a home run with this deal, we are going to need to get two of the following in July: Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Johnson. However, I vehemently disagree with the notion that we are dead if we don't get two max guys. There are plenty of other good players out there to build a playoff team with. What if we got Amare Stoudemire (assuming you don't consider him a "max" player) and Joe Johnson? What if we got Carlos Boozer and Joe Johnson?? What if we got Michael Redd, Rudy Gay, and Joe Johnson??? What if we re-signed Mcgrady (assuming he plays really well for us down the stretch), and then only got Bosh??? Aren't all of these combinations likely playoff teams??? And, isn't it also true that we still have a 1st round pick next summer??? And aren't we allowed to decide not to spend all of our cap money this offseason and save some for next summer when Carmello Anthony is available??? The answer to all of these questions is a resounding YES. Simply put, there are just so many possibilities. As Donnie Walsh himself put it to the media, this move gives us "flexibility". I really think said flexibility is being greatly overlooked by most of the pundits in the media. There are a lot of really good players out there who are not quite good enough to earn max contracts, and yet, still could help the Knicks improve drastically.

I don't believe this trade was anywhere near as "high-risk" as it's being made out to be. Obviously, for us to hit a home run with this deal, we are going to need to get two of the following in July: Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Johnson. However, I vehemently disagree with the notion that we are dead if we don't get two max guys. There are plenty of other good players out there to build a playoff team with. What if we got Amare Stoudemire (assuming you don't consider him a "max" player) and Joe Johnson? What if we got Carlos Boozer and Joe Johnson?? What if we got Michael Redd, Rudy Gay, and Joe Johnson??? What if we re-signed Mcgrady (assuming he plays really well for us down the stretch), and then only got Bosh??? Aren't all of these combinations likely playoff teams??? And, isn't it also true that we still have a 1st round pick next summer??? And aren't we allowed to decide not to spend all of our cap money this offseason and save some for next summer when Carmello Anthony is available??? The answer to all of these questions is a resounding YES. Simply put, there are just so many possibilities. As Donnie Walsh himself put it to the media, this move gives us "flexibility". I really think said flexibility is being greatly overlooked by most of the pundits in the media. There are a lot of really good players out there who are not quite good enough to earn max contracts, and yet, still could help the Knicks improve drastically.

Good points. If for some reason we can't sign Lebron, Wade, or Bosh the 2010 plan will become the 2011 plan. We could resign David Lee , and enter the 2011 market with even more cap room when Curry comes off the books. Then we could pursue Chris Paul, Carmelo, or both.

There is this idea out there that Walsh is taking a HUGE risk with this plan. I ask these people, what other option did he have? The only way to rebuild this team was to get under the cap. I believe Donnie when he says that he didn't even know who the free agent class of 2010 was when he made this plan. He doesn't matter. This is what we had to do regardless. If it doesn't work out this summer, we need to be patient and make it happen the following summer.